all 38 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 34 points 2 months ago (1 child)

He use AI to put print statements, summarize output and describe code based on prints to narrow place of bug. This is exactly what AI is good at. Funny fact is that you don't need data center scale model for it. You can do it with local model.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    3060 ti 8GB and 32 GB DDR4 says no, I can't do that or anything else useful with a local model.

    However. Deepseek V4 flash is very cheap and fast. It'll do anything simple and some complex things you throw at it

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 203 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I don't have the time to write out the full response to this I want to right now, so I just want to say there is an almost immeasurable gulf between someone like Linus Torvalds using AI for debugging vs a coked out techbro junior engineer vibecoding the next Spotify but for access to water.

    In my heart of hearts I still wish he wouldn't touch the stuff just for the message this is going to send to all the wrong kinds of people but here we are.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Just use ai to write out your longer response /s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    That would improve length, comprehension, desirability, gramification, and … hold on, still buffering out the Vibe List of random categories I posthoc figured help justify my point. AI taught me that’s a good way to make points.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    But while the AI was ready to give up several times, it did keep adding debug code and analyzing it faithfully when I pushed.

    Well, no shit, all they can do is follow instructions. We just really can't help avoid anthropomorphizing something that speaks language and think it was a good boy for stopping whining and trying again

  • source
  • [–] 67 points 2 months ago* (12 children)

    If an AI can find the bug and point it out, I don't see a problem, as long as it is checked thoroughly enough by an actual skilled programmer, to make sure that doing what the AI suggest is not making things worse.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 65 points 2 months ago

    The exact quote is:

    And this was a debug session from hell, enormously helped by an AI doing much of the grunt-work.

    I'd like to call it my tireless helper, but the AI several times stated flat out that this was impossible and unsolvable and that we should just write a report about it.

    I suspect those things have been trained by people who may not be quite as stubborn as I am.

    But while the AI was ready to give up several times, it did keep adding debug code and analyzing it faithfully when I pushed. So credit where credit is due and I let the AI write the commit message above.

    This is basically a one-liner fixing a bogus "round_up()" to a "round_down()", but there were 24 patches adding more and more debug information to this, and 18 kernel boot to finally narrow it down to this. - Linus

    That's a long way short of finding the bug and pointing it out, and instead is just the tedious work of adding checks and then deciding where to add more checks when you have the result of the previous checks. I suspect if we'd spent a trillion dollars on a tool for that, we could have come up with something much more efficient than an LLM.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 8 points 2 months ago
    [removed by mod]
  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • [–] -5 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    So you don't care about environment, huh?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    Hey, Mr. Self-righteous. Tell us about how you live in a small efficient urban dwelling served nearly entirely by renewable energy, that you don't own a car, don't eat meat, and never take longer than a 5 minute shower.

    And if even one of those things isn't true, I demand a full explanation for why you hate the planet and want it to die.

    Especially if you own a car. If you own a car and you're shaming people for the environmental impact of AI, you owe it to us all to sell that thing today and prove your superiority to the rest of us.

    EDIT: Nevermind, just reviewed your comment history to see that you are an enthusiastic spectator of the Russia/Ukraine war. Given that war is the single most ecologically destructive force on the planet, it is clear that you are completely irredeemable, and should keep your snide comments to yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    They are not magic. You are still using electricity, and for the same amount of work that cloud providers do you will consume the same amount. If every one of the billions of people using chatgpt or whatever buys rtx 5090 and makes it churn 24/7 for their "local" ai then nothing will change for the environment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    But isn't it as bad as running a graphically intensive AAA game on your computer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    That's still just moving the impact from data centers to end users' machines.

    Gamers (especially those that own 5090) are a tiny minority compared to llm users.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    This will just waste even more energy since cpus are less efficient at this kind of task.

    LLMs require insane amounts of compute, period. The hardware to do that needs energy and emits heat, there is no way around.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Ha! I recently went through a similar process, trying to get some hardware working for a different project that would close some 15+ year old bugs. AI helped me find it, getting sidetracked by several other small bugs in the same few files along the way.

    I then wrote the actual fixes myself as a series of very small PRs. They’re all just a handful of lines each, enabling certain hardware flags, properly bounds checking loops, getting a timer initialization corrected, etc. They are all the sort of thing that once you see where they are, the fix is extremely obvious.

    In the meantime, the project has adopted a very strict no AI assistance at all policy after some internal debate that almost tore the project apart.

    So now I’m sitting on almost a dozen fixes for longstanding problems and have no idea if I should lie and say yes, I found these entirely by myself, or tell the truth, probably get kicked out of the project, and see how much of a shit storm they cause.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Both extremes are absolutely maddening here. I'm getting as sick of the anti-AI crowd as I am the vibe-code-tech-bros. At this point you could just put them all in a sack and start hitting them with sticks and wouldn't care who got the worst of it.

    There's a definite middle-ground here. Linus is one of the ultimate pragmatists and it shows here. It was helpful - so he used it. It helped you so you used it. I've found it to be incredibly helpful so I use it.

    Not all usages are equal just as all hand-written code is not equal. There are good ways to use these tools and bad ways. But the tools themselves are still just tools.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    Yeah, it's like a calculator. Don't get reliant on it. Know why it gives an answer, be able to get to the answer yourself, but appreciate the time saving of the calculator when you can verify that it was correct much faster than getting to the answer yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    This isn’t such a simple question.

    If you think about it that way, the atomic bomb is also a kind of tool, but not everyone is allowed to use it...

    If a tool starts thinking for you, it’s clearly a different kind of tool than most known tools. Different tools have different safety procedures. :)

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Honestly 15+ year old bugs are also left in the linux kernel for people to pick up, Learn from and get deeper in kernel development. They know they can easily find them with a LLM but choose not to. Policy's are changing due to the mass influx of these "bug" fixes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    Not really... "Education" and real world are vastly different. Getting accustomed to a mailing list other maintainers etc is not something you learn with your education.

    And leaving bugs for hardware no one has touched in ages is not too big of a deal. And a nice gateway for new comers who actually want to learn it instead of trow a LLM at it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago

    Honestly I am so tired of intels shit. I have been buying and plugging their GPUs but goddamn their shit is annoying to deal with sometimes. I’m glad Linus is chipping in to improve it. We need another big player.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    The code it committed has comments with "old code did this", "old code did that", like AI likes to insert. That is not useful info. It's what version control is for... You can explain why you do a thing, like the AI does at the start, the actual code edited. The assertion it edited is just clutered with irrelevant info now. Is including history like this the usual style for the kernel, seeing that Linus himself signed off on it?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago
    [–] 0 points 2 months ago
    [–] -1 points 2 months ago

    And yet no "AI" existed...

  • source